On Jan 18, 9:54 am, shahid <[email protected]> wrote: > In my application I always define an inner handler classes > (implementing a handler interface) for all sorts of events e.g. > ClickHandler, ValueChangeHandler etc. and then I use them in the main > (outer) class using NEW handerl(). I could however use the outer class > to implement the interface itself. I wonder if that would make any > difference to the application's size and speed: > > class A { > > class B implements ClickHandler { > ..... onClick here .... > > } > > public void someMethod(){ > Anchor a = new Anchor("Link"); > a.addClickHandler(new B()); > > } > } > > Will doing the following instead make any difference to the generated > javascript's size and speed: > > class A implements ClickHandler { > ... implement the onClick ... > > ... use addClickHandler(this) elsewhere in methods .... > > > > }
It would probably make a small difference, but I doubt it'd be perceptible (even in our beloved sluggish IE6). Re. maintainability of your code though, you're changing the "contract" of A, which is now a ClickHandler that "anyone" could attach to "anything". (that's the same rationale for using a Composite rather than deriving an existing widget)
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Web Toolkit" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en.
